What is the best numerical conversion factor between WELLBYs and DALYs?
Cost-effectiveness analysis requires comparing interventions measured in different units. GiveWell uses DALYs for physical health interventions; mental health researchers often use WELLBYs. Funders comparing StrongMinds (WELLBYs) to malaria bednets (DALYs) need a conversion factor. Current estimates range from 2-15 WELLBYs per DALY depending on methodology.
Question
If a charity prevents 1 DALY (Disability-Adjusted Life Year), approximately how many WELLBYs does this represent?
Range: 1-20 (log scale) · Default: 6
Critique & Considerations
- Strength: Concrete, numeric, directly actionable for funders
- Challenge: Resolution criteria unclear—no objective ground truth
- Suggestion: Consider "What conversion factor will Founders Pledge adopt by 2028?" for clearer resolution
Is a single WELLBY measure better than measuring wellbeing dimensions separately?
Single WELLBY uses one 0-10 life satisfaction question, converted to years. Multi-dimensional approaches measure affect, life satisfaction, and eudaimonia separately, then combine. Trade-off: simplicity vs information richness.
Question
For comparing interventions affecting both mental and physical health, which approach is better?
Options: Single WELLBY (>60% contexts) · Multi-dimensional (>60% contexts) · Depends (~50/50)
Critique & Considerations
- Strength: Clear binary/categorical framing possible
- Challenge: "Better" undefined—reliability? accuracy? practicality?
- Suggestion: Specify criterion: "Which produces more consistent intervention rankings across evaluators?"
Should wellbeing CEA rely on life satisfaction or momentary experience measures?
Life satisfaction is evaluative ("Overall, how satisfied are you with your life?"). Experience measures capture momentary affect via sampling or Day Reconstruction Method. Kahneman distinguished these as different constructs with weak correlation.
Question
For cost-effectiveness analysis of interventions affecting wellbeing, which should be the primary metric?
Options: Life satisfaction · Momentary experience · Both equally · Depends on intervention
Critique & Considerations
- Strength: Well-defined constructs from psychology literature
- Challenge: May not have clear resolution—ongoing methodological debate
- Suggestion: Reframe as: "By 2030, will major CEA orgs primarily use life satisfaction (>70% weight)?"
How much more cost-effective would optimal wellbeing measurement be compared to linear WELLBY?
Linear WELLBY assumes equal intervals (3→4 same as 7→8) and no scale-use heterogeneity adjustment. Alternative measures may capture welfare more accurately but at higher measurement cost.
Question
Consider allocating $100,000 optimally using (a) the best feasible measure vs (b) linear WELLBY. What ratio of costs achieves equivalent welfare outcomes?
Range: 1.0-3.0 · Default: 1.1
Critique & Considerations
- Challenge: Highly abstract—hard for forecasters to reason about
- Challenge: "Best feasible measure" is undefined—needs operationalization
- Suggestion: Reframe as "What % welfare is lost by using linear WELLBY?" (0-50% scale)
- Suggestion: Specify concrete alternatives (e.g., "scale-adjusted WELLBY" vs "linear WELLBY")
Metaculus Suitability Summary
| Code | Recommended? | Reason |
|---|---|---|
| DALY_01 | Yes | Most concrete, directly actionable for funders |
| WELL_04 | Yes | Clear binary framing possible |
| WELL_08 | Yes | Well-defined psychological constructs |
| WELL_01a | Maybe | Needs reframing to be forecastable |
| WELL_03a | Probably not | Too hypothetical, unclear resolution |